{"comments":{"user_name":"none","offComments":false,"page":null,"request_url":"\/loadcommentdetails?story=299808&articleUri=\/blogs\/NickPearce\/20170612\/299808\/The_pros_and_cons_of_Bethesdas_Creation_Club.php&story_type=blog&_=1580442413083","story_id":299808,"comment_data":[{"id":"294605","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"1001884","anonymous":"0","date_time":"12 Jun 2017 at 1:08 pm","website":"none","comment_body":"Well written and well argued. I'm very interested in this. When Valve\/Bethesda introduced paid mods before I blogged here (Gamasutra) on the topic. I started writing intending to have a balanced and unbiased argument. While it's unbiased (I don't make mods or even really use them) I wound up coming heavily down in favour of no paid mods.
I fundamentally agree that work deserves to be paid for, so my reasons centred mostly around your reasons 13 and 14 , which I think are still valid concerns. Today though, looking at this again but with a curated system in place, this could really work out. The uncurated system was just too messy.

My other issue was with modders getting so precious little of the cut. 25% is absolutely criminal, if you ask me. As you pointed out, the modders do most of the work. Bethesda did create the platform, but the work is automated after that. Each new mod is incremental work done entirely by the modder. The situation is a partnership between both parties but I feel the respect wasn't there when modders got less than 50%.

In an uncurated system I'd have felt 90% was fair. In this curated version, why not go 50:50? I hope we see that split, but I highly doubt we will.
If the future is paid mods, I do hope it's not an exploited system, but a true partnership. Paying lipservice to 'rewarding content creators' while giving them the smallest slice of their work is just corporate hypocrisy in action.

Paid mods could be a revolution, and I hope to see it start off on the right foot, with respect for the creators. ","comment_type":"comment","parent_id":"0","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"1001884","member_standing":null,"personId":"1001884","firstname":"Kevin","lastname":"Murphy","blog_id":"1001884","portrait_path":"portrait.jpg?1482355642","legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"1","com_rep":"comment","original_comment_body":"Well written and well argued. I'm very interested in this. When Valve\/Bethesda introduced paid mods before I blogged here (Gamasutra) on the topic. I started writing intending to have a balanced and unbiased argument. While it's unbiased (I don't make mods or even really use them) I wound up coming heavily down in favour of no paid mods. I fundamentally agree that work deserves to be paid for, so my reasons centred mostly around your reasons 13 and 14 , which I think are still valid concerns. Today though, looking at this again but with a curated system in place, this could really work out. The uncurated system was just too messy. My other issue was with modders getting so precious little of the cut. 25% is absolutely criminal, if you ask me. As you pointed out, the modders do most of the work. Bethesda did create the platform, but the work is automated after that. Each new mod is incremental work done entirely by the modder. The situation is a partnership between both parties but I feel the respect wasn't there when modders got less than 50%. In an uncurated system I'd have felt 90% was fair. In this curated version, why not go 50:50? I hope we see that split, but I highly doubt we will. If the future is paid mods, I do hope it's not an exploited system, but a true partnership. Paying lipservice to 'rewarding content creators' while giving them the smallest slice of their work is just corporate hypocrisy in action. Paid mods could be a revolution, and I hope to see it start off on the right foot, with respect for the creators.","author_url_name":"KevinMurphy","author_url":"\/blogs\/KevinMurphy\/1001884\/","comment_likes":["1004267"]},{"id":"294612","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"1011398","anonymous":"0","date_time":"13 Jun 2017 at 9:30 am","website":"none","comment_body":"It's sounds like they're really shooting for more of a contract-style development method where Bethesda stays involved in each stage of the process. I really like the structure of what they're shooting for, so it's just down to delivery.

I think pricing for each mod is also going to be critically important to their success. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294605","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"1011398","member_standing":null,"personId":"1011398","firstname":"Nick","lastname":"Clark","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"It's sounds like they're really shooting for more of a contract-style development method where Bethesda stays involved in each stage of the process. I really like the structure of what they're shooting for, so it's just down to delivery. I think pricing for each mod is also going to be critically important to their success.","author_url_name":"NickClark","author_url":"\/blogs\/NickClark\/\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294622","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"1018089","anonymous":"0","date_time":"14 Jun 2017 at 3:15 am","website":"none","comment_body":"The modders will be getting far, far less than 50\/50 this time, more like 2% to 10% of revenue most likely. It appears to be a contract system, where Bethesda gives a series of payments for milestones to developers around the world after they put in 90% of the effort. It will be a system where a modder\/game dev gets paid a few thousand dollars and Bethesda makes half a million by selling it to a 200,000 people at $2.50.

So basically the modder comes up with the idea, pitches the idea, does the initial groundwork. If beth thinks its worth continuing they give you some money, probably well below normal contract rates for the hours worked. If you jump through their hoops, do 90% of the work and produce something they are sure will sell a bunch of copies and win them a big payday they give you a bit more to finish it. When you are done you get to see your item up for sale, but probably be never made aware just how much money it raked in and congratulations, you have just been exploited by a large multinational corporation. They get work done for cheap, skirting any labor laws and the high wages in their country, with no guarantee of future work, payment for software you have used, healthcare etc and you get to compete for work with the rest of the planet. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294605","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"1018089","member_standing":null,"personId":"1018089","firstname":"Rob","lastname":"Braddon","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"The modders will be getting far, far less than 50\/50 this time, more like 2% to 10% of revenue most likely. It appears to be a contract system, where Bethesda gives a series of payments for milestones to developers around the world after they put in 90% of the effort. It will be a system where a modder\/game dev gets paid a few thousand dollars and Bethesda makes half a million by selling it to a 200,000 people at $2.50. So basically the modder comes up with the idea, pitches the idea, does the initial groundwork. If beth thinks its worth continuing they give you some money, probably well below normal contract rates for the hours worked. If you jump through their hoops, do 90% of the work and produce something they are sure will sell a bunch of copies and win them a big payday they give you a bit more to finish it. When you are done you get to see your item up for sale, but probably be never made aware just how much money it raked in and congratulations, you have just been exploited by a large multinational corporation. They get work done for cheap, skirting any labor laws and the high wages in their country, with no guarantee of future work, payment for software you have used, healthcare etc and you get to compete for work with the rest of the planet.","author_url_name":"RobBraddon","author_url":"\/blogs\/RobBraddon\/\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294685","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"1001884","anonymous":"0","date_time":"16 Jun 2017 at 1:28 pm","website":"none","comment_body":"Heh. Sounds about right.
Funny how I usually think of Bethesda as pretty decent folk, and simultaneously dislike Zenimax. I think that's called cognitive dissonance.. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294622","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"1001884","member_standing":null,"personId":"1001884","firstname":"Kevin","lastname":"Murphy","blog_id":"1001884","portrait_path":"portrait.jpg?1482355642","legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"Heh. Sounds about right. Funny how I usually think of Bethesda as pretty decent folk, and simultaneously dislike Zenimax. I think that's called cognitive dissonance..","author_url_name":"KevinMurphy","author_url":"\/blogs\/KevinMurphy\/1001884\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294615","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"982590","anonymous":"0","date_time":"13 Jun 2017 at 5:35 pm","website":"none","comment_body":"Bethesda hasn't said much about the most important part of this - how much devs will get - but their past record of offering them only 25% back in 2015 isn't in any way reassuring.

And that's the biggest issue here: there's a big chance people will get paid peanuts for their work.

It will be like Bethesda making hundreds of DLCs, but instead of properly hiring developers, with full salaries & benefits, they give pocket change to thousands of modders and go "if you make something popular, you'll earn a lot more!". The economical risk is now on the modders, while Bethesda makes money from taking a cut in all purchases. That's not a healthy environment. ","comment_type":"comment","parent_id":"0","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"982590","member_standing":null,"personId":"982590","firstname":"Felipe","lastname":"Pepe","blog_id":"982590","portrait_path":"portrait.jpg?1506072745","legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"1","com_rep":"comment","original_comment_body":"Bethesda hasn't said much about the most important part of this - how much devs will get - but their past record of offering them only 25% back in 2015 isn't in any way reassuring. And that's the biggest issue here: there's a big chance people will get paid peanuts for their work. It will be like Bethesda making hundreds of DLCs, but instead of properly hiring developers, with full salaries & benefits, they give pocket change to thousands of modders and go "if you make something popular, you'll earn a lot more!". The economical risk is now on the modders, while Bethesda makes money from taking a cut in all purchases. That's not a healthy environment.","author_url_name":"FelipePepe","author_url":"\/blogs\/FelipePepe\/982590\/","comment_likes":["914504"]},{"id":"294649","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"537269","anonymous":"0","date_time":"15 Jun 2017 at 11:43 am","website":"none","comment_body":"I think the lack of comment on the percentages actually indicates something else - negotiability. There will probably be some basic brackets, but no one standard rate. Modders and teams that produce more complex and higher quality products will be able to negotiate higher rates. Of course, to some extent this will probably be hidden behind a wall of NDAs, but that's nothing unusual.

Regarding economic risk - I think you got this point fundamentally wrong. The economic risk for modders is not greater in this system, but smaller. Previously, modders knew that they will not benefit, and indeed lose resources (time and\/or money) by producing mods. In this new system, modders still have a possibility of losing economically, but they have gained the possibility of actually not losing economically. This is a less risky environment for them by definition.

I think there is a really big problem here with people presenting Bethesda's share as being somehow intrinsically unfair. Bethesda has the choice of allowing people to monetise mods - or not to allow it. Any share of revenues, whether it's 5%, 25%, or 100%, is inherently fair, in that Bethesda is allowing someone to gain revenues where they otherwise would not be able to. There was never anything unfair about Bethesda wanting to hold on to 75%.

Also, a thought occurs here. People are looking at this only from the perspective of modding. But this is not actually just about modding. This is a very, very interesting development in that potentially, even commercial entities can effectively license Bethesda's game infrastructure to develop completely new games. The only catch is that you can't develop a standalone game - but I'm willing to bet that in a particularly successful case, Bethesda would be willing to negotiate on this point as well. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294615","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"537269","member_standing":null,"personId":"537269","firstname":"Jakub","lastname":"Majewski","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"I think the lack of comment on the percentages actually indicates something else - negotiability. There will probably be some basic brackets, but no one standard rate. Modders and teams that produce more complex and higher quality products will be able to negotiate higher rates. Of course, to some extent this will probably be hidden behind a wall of NDAs, but that's nothing unusual. Regarding economic risk - I think you got this point fundamentally wrong. The economic risk for modders is not greater in this system, but smaller. Previously, modders knew that they will not benefit, and indeed lose resources (time and\/or money) by producing mods. In this new system, modders still have a possibility of losing economically, but they have gained the possibility of actually not losing economically. This is a less risky environment for them by definition. I think there is a really big problem here with people presenting Bethesda's share as being somehow intrinsically unfair. Bethesda has the choice of allowing people to monetise mods - or not to allow it. Any share of revenues, whether it's 5%, 25%, or 100%, is inherently fair, in that Bethesda is allowing someone to gain revenues where they otherwise would not be able to. There was never anything unfair about Bethesda wanting to hold on to 75%. Also, a thought occurs here. People are looking at this only from the perspective of modding. But this is not actually just about modding. This is a very, very interesting development in that potentially, even commercial entities can effectively license Bethesda's game infrastructure to develop completely new games. The only catch is that you can't develop a standalone game - but I'm willing to bet that in a particularly successful case, Bethesda would be willing to negotiate on this point as well.","author_url_name":"JakubMajewski","author_url":"\/blogs\/JakubMajewski\/\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294616","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"994338","anonymous":"0","date_time":"13 Jun 2017 at 5:45 pm","website":"none","comment_body":"Edits: Added PS. Deleted the original comment....

Bethesda is just making sure they earn extra cash with minimal effort possible. If they really cared about the modders, they would do like TalesWorlds and Firaxis did and hire them.

All that paied mod means is that they can get a new revenue without lifting a single finger and without putting any resources at risk, in case the development of fail.

I just can't see it in a good light, at all.


PS: Also that's some REALLLY Biased "article". You pointed 4 "pros" and didn't say a single word that could put in doubt these pros, EX: Content creators not benefiting in anything, when yourself got notority because of a mod you did.(Like for real you LITERALLY use the mod as a welcome card in this site)

While showing 14 "cons" and made sure to attack every single one, most of times with some REALLY debatable arguments. ","comment_type":"comment","parent_id":"0","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"994338","member_standing":null,"personId":"994338","firstname":"Vitor","lastname":"Batista","blog_id":"994338","portrait_path":"portrait.png?1562109761","legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"3","com_rep":"comment","original_comment_body":"Edits: Added PS. Deleted the original comment.... Bethesda is just making sure they earn extra cash with minimal effort possible. If they really cared about the modders, they would do like TalesWorlds and Firaxis did and hire them. All that paied mod means is that they can get a new revenue without lifting a single finger and without putting any resources at risk, in case the development of fail. I just can't see it in a good light, at all. PS: Also that's some REALLLY Biased "article". You pointed 4 "pros" and didn't say a single word that could put in doubt these pros, EX: Content creators not benefiting in anything, when yourself got notority because of a mod you did.(Like for real you LITERALLY use the mod as a welcome card in this site) While showing 14 "cons" and made sure to attack every single one, most of times with some REALLY debatable arguments.","author_url_name":"VitorBatista","author_url":"\/blogs\/VitorBatista\/994338\/","comment_likes":["874276","1018091","914504"]},{"id":"294648","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"537269","anonymous":"0","date_time":"15 Jun 2017 at 11:28 am","website":"none","comment_body":"You know, it's very easy to say this is a biased article... but perhaps it would be better if you tried to prove this point with evidence? The simple way to do so, of course, is simply to present the counterarguments to the pros.

And yes, you made a start on this with the claim that content creators do benefit from mods by gaining fame. This is a fair point. I would add to this (and I literally have a survey of Skyrim modders to back this point up) that most modders benefit in other ways (including having fun, enjoying the community, gaining new skills through modding, etc.), and really do not feel the need to monetise.

But, here's the thing: none of this actually affects the claim that the current system benefits everyone but the modders. Because the claim isn't that modders gain nothing from modding - rather, the claim is that the current system is skewed against modders. So, the counterargument that is needed here, is that modders somehow benefit from the fact that they cannot monetise their mods. This, to me, seems like an impossible point to argue.

I mean, if the new system required all modders to monetise, that would be a different story - then there would be a very real claim to make that the new system will negatively affect modding. As it stands, however, the new system is purely optional. It adds previously unavailable choices for modders. It does not take away any options they currently have (they CAN still release for free; they CAN still rely on Patreon and other means).

(and no, the fact that Bethesda benefits from this does not in any way affect the argument, because it's not a zero-sum game - Bethesda's benefits do not affect modders negatively)

All in all, I think in this case the bias of the article stems simply from the fact that really, the facts in this case are utterly one-sided. But I'm certainly open to being persuaded otherwise - so, can you come up with counterarguments? ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294616","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"537269","member_standing":null,"personId":"537269","firstname":"Jakub","lastname":"Majewski","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"You know, it's very easy to say this is a biased article... but perhaps it would be better if you tried to prove this point with evidence? The simple way to do so, of course, is simply to present the counterarguments to the pros. And yes, you made a start on this with the claim that content creators do benefit from mods by gaining fame. This is a fair point. I would add to this (and I literally have a survey of Skyrim modders to back this point up) that most modders benefit in other ways (including having fun, enjoying the community, gaining new skills through modding, etc.), and really do not feel the need to monetise. But, here's the thing: none of this actually affects the claim that the current system benefits everyone but the modders. Because the claim isn't that modders gain nothing from modding - rather, the claim is that the current system is skewed against modders. So, the counterargument that is needed here, is that modders somehow benefit from the fact that they cannot monetise their mods. This, to me, seems like an impossible point to argue. I mean, if the new system required all modders to monetise, that would be a different story - then there would be a very real claim to make that the new system will negatively affect modding. As it stands, however, the new system is purely optional. It adds previously unavailable choices for modders. It does not take away any options they currently have (they CAN still release for free; they CAN still rely on Patreon and other means). (and no, the fact that Bethesda benefits from this does not in any way affect the argument, because it's not a zero-sum game - Bethesda's benefits do not affect modders negatively) All in all, I think in this case the bias of the article stems simply from the fact that really, the facts in this case are utterly one-sided. But I'm certainly open to being persuaded otherwise - so, can you come up with counterarguments?","author_url_name":"JakubMajewski","author_url":"\/blogs\/JakubMajewski\/\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294654","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"994338","anonymous":"0","date_time":"15 Jun 2017 at 2:43 pm","website":"none","comment_body":"No it's biased because he didn't even care to give counter arguments for the pros while took a HELL of effort to point counters against the cons.

It's biased because even the structure of the "article" shows how controversial the topic is, so much that's pathetic. 4 pros against 14 cons? And he don't even give chance for debate. You don't see ANYTHING wrong here?

I don't point every single argument because i would have to write a entire article, in the comments section. And i'm only pointing that there's flaws in his logic, alot of flaws.

Let's not forget that the argument "it's only a options" doesn't fly here because the community got REALLY toxic in the first try, and i'm not talking only about the users, but also the content creators of paied mods, that ALSO went ape shit because ppl released mods with similar use for free.(Yeah i didn't forget that sir article creator)

And the community in general is what drive people to share mods, SHARE, not create. Having a toxic community will make people share less mods, that's a fact.

And the 14 cons is the highlight. Because you are simply earning money from other's people work. EVEN if they say it's ok, most of times is just to make sure they are not creating a argument, it's not ok to use their work to earn money. PS: in the SKSE case it's for legal reasons they literally CAN'T accept money, even for donations.

It's not one sided, it's just the fact that the author, and apparently you, have something to earn from that change. That make easy to overlook all the cons for the sake of you makin some extra.

PS:https:\/\/forums.nexusmods.com\/index.php?\/topic\/5716417-paid-mods \/?p=50893812 ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294648","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"994338","member_standing":null,"personId":"994338","firstname":"Vitor","lastname":"Batista","blog_id":"994338","portrait_path":"portrait.png?1562109761","legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"No it's biased because he didn't even care to give counter arguments for the pros while took a HELL of effort to point counters against the cons. It's biased because even the structure of the "article" shows how controversial the topic is, so much that's pathetic. 4 pros against 14 cons? And he don't even give chance for debate. You don't see ANYTHING wrong here? I don't point every single argument because i would have to write a entire article, in the comments section. And i'm only pointing that there's flaws in his logic, alot of flaws. Let's not forget that the argument "it's only a options" doesn't fly here because the community got REALLY toxic in the first try, and i'm not talking only about the users, but also the content creators of paied mods, that ALSO went ape shit because ppl released mods with similar use for free.(Yeah i didn't forget that sir article creator) And the community in general is what drive people to share mods, SHARE, not create. Having a toxic community will make people share less mods, that's a fact. And the 14 cons is the highlight. Because you are simply earning money from other's people work. EVEN if they say it's ok, most of times is just to make sure they are not creating a argument, it's not ok to use their work to earn money. PS: in the SKSE case it's for legal reasons they literally CAN'T accept money, even for donations. It's not one sided, it's just the fact that the author, and apparently you, have something to earn from that change. That make easy to overlook all the cons for the sake of you makin some extra. PS:https:\/\/forums.nexusmods.com\/index.php?\/topic\/5716417-paid-mods\/?p=50893812","author_url_name":"VitorBatista","author_url":"\/blogs\/VitorBatista\/994338\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294662","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"537269","anonymous":"0","date_time":"16 Jun 2017 at 12:42 am","website":"none","comment_body":"Just to be clear - I have nothing to earn from this change, and I think it's somewhat petty to make this assumption when I've given you no reason to do so.

As for the rest of the discussion, again I invite you to present a counterargument. You don't have to do it in a comment, you can publish it properly. I will genuinely be very interested in reading it, because at the moment, I genuinely cannot see any real problems with this Creation Club thing. I am aware of the fact that many modders are angry about the mere possibility of mods for profit. I know the levels of emotion this generates. But emotion is not logic. If there is an actual argument to be made against paid mods, an argument that goes beyond "people don't like them", I would very much like to see this argument laid out in detail. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294654","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"537269","member_standing":null,"personId":"537269","firstname":"Jakub","lastname":"Majewski","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"Just to be clear - I have nothing to earn from this change, and I think it's somewhat petty to make this assumption when I've given you no reason to do so. As for the rest of the discussion, again I invite you to present a counterargument. You don't have to do it in a comment, you can publish it properly. I will genuinely be very interested in reading it, because at the moment, I genuinely cannot see any real problems with this Creation Club thing. I am aware of the fact that many modders are angry about the mere possibility of mods for profit. I know the levels of emotion this generates. But emotion is not logic. If there is an actual argument to be made against paid mods, an argument that goes beyond "people don't like them", I would very much like to see this argument laid out in detail.","author_url_name":"JakubMajewski","author_url":"\/blogs\/JakubMajewski\/\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294665","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"994338","anonymous":"0","date_time":"16 Jun 2017 at 4:18 am","website":"none","comment_body":"If i was rude i apologize, but you gave a reason: You said it's a one sided topic. When clearly isn't.
Let's put this way Bethesda is gettin A HELL of flake. Assuming it's a one sided topic is saying that everyone else is not only ignorant, because they and WE don't know exactly what are the terms of the creation club(just Bethesda sucking at communication as always), you are also assuming them to be stupid because "IT'S OBVIOUS!". When clearly it isn't given how much controverse there's. And normally people that do it are the people that have something to win.

Counterpoints for the "pros"-
1. It\u00e2\u0080\u0099s inherently fair for skilled content developers to be paid for their work.
IF the work is entirely his own work. And as we saw in the first attempt that wasn't a priority for Bethesda.
Also in the example you are forgetting that the company that sell wood in your city is the one that hired your neighbor, they likely will stop selling wood to all other people that do the same work as your neighbor( I'm assuming that part, but it IS expected that mods "too much alike" a mod that is made by Bethesda will get shot down.)


2. The current system benefits everyone except content developers.
The author is a MAJOR example that this is a lie, given that what made him relevant and also likely had a impact in his future as a game dev was a mod. (Good for him. Seriously it's always good to see new faces doing different things)
The only thing is that said benefit may take some time and may not come in the form of money.

3. Bethesda is entitled to introduce paid content.
Not really a argument, but in theory they also should enforce copyright laws in their plataform and so far they never cared to do so, given the ammount of stolen mods in their free plataform. It just happend that the general modder don't have the resources to go after them.(also another black flag)


4. Creation Club will result in more and better content.
Partially true. IF all modders were in equal footing that would be 100% true. But the creation club create 2 different ranks for modders. And unless you are in the "club" you aren't part of the market and are swimming against the tide.
Also lets not forget that modding never was a precision gun, it always was a spray and pray strategy in the hope that someone hits a target.
The mod that the author made was based in dozens of smaller mods, that weren't as successful but ended serving as tutorials and experience taht turned in the footing for better mods later on.
That's why i argue that the community is important for modding, because there was pretty much no secret, you could simply ask how something was done and the modder, generally, had no problem in answering. Turn this in a race and i can say at least 1\/3 of the modders will change their posture, since you may very well take their place in the club.

I think i should go way deeper than that. But i really don't feel like doing a article because my english is not good enough, i would have to put a lot of time refining the text and cutting the typos and i really don't think an article here will change anything.(not being worth the time)

PS: about the 4 argument, before you say something like "That's assuming the modders are interested in earning money to start with" that's true, but if they aren't interested in earning money the argument of bringing money brings and retain more talent is a lie, since money don't bring talent, money brings who wants money. being talented or not. While the talented people end getting the money they want, the not talented generally turns into a toxic element for the community that can make others talents leave. (It only takes one slip of Bethesda to give money to someone stealing ideas and we lose talent.) ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294662","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"994338","member_standing":null,"personId":"994338","firstname":"Vitor","lastname":"Batista","blog_id":"994338","portrait_path":"portrait.png?1562109761","legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"If i was rude i apologize, but you gave a reason: You said it's a one sided topic. When clearly isn't. Let's put this way Bethesda is gettin A HELL of flake. Assuming it's a one sided topic is saying that everyone else is not only ignorant, because they and WE don't know exactly what are the terms of the creation club(just Bethesda sucking at communication as always), you are also assuming them to be stupid because "IT'S OBVIOUS!". When clearly it isn't given how much controverse there's. And normally people that do it are the people that have something to win. Counterpoints for the "pros"- 1. It\u00e2\u0080\u0099s inherently fair for skilled content developers to be paid for their work. IF the work is entirely his own work. And as we saw in the first attempt that wasn't a priority for Bethesda. Also in the example you are forgetting that the company that sell wood in your city is the one that hired your neighbor, they likely will stop selling wood to all other people that do the same work as your neighbor( I'm assuming that part, but it IS expected that mods "too much alike" a mod that is made by Bethesda will get shot down.) 2. The current system benefits everyone except content developers. The author is a MAJOR example that this is a lie, given that what made him relevant and also likely had a impact in his future as a game dev was a mod. (Good for him. Seriously it's always good to see new faces doing different things) The only thing is that said benefit may take some time and may not come in the form of money. 3. Bethesda is entitled to introduce paid content. Not really a argument, but in theory they also should enforce copyright laws in their plataform and so far they never cared to do so, given the ammount of stolen mods in their free plataform. It just happend that the general modder don't have the resources to go after them.(also another black flag) 4. Creation Club will result in more and better content. Partially true. IF all modders were in equal footing that would be 100% true. But the creation club create 2 different ranks for modders. And unless you are in the "club" you aren't part of the market and are swimming against the tide. Also lets not forget that modding never was a precision gun, it always was a spray and pray strategy in the hope that someone hits a target. The mod that the author made was based in dozens of smaller mods, that weren't as successful but ended serving as tutorials and experience taht turned in the footing for better mods later on. That's why i argue that the community is important for modding, because there was pretty much no secret, you could simply ask how something was done and the modder, generally, had no problem in answering. Turn this in a race and i can say at least 1\/3 of the modders will change their posture, since you may very well take their place in the club. I think i should go way deeper than that. But i really don't feel like doing a article because my english is not good enough, i would have to put a lot of time refining the text and cutting the typos and i really don't think an article here will change anything.(not being worth the time) PS: about the 4 argument, before you say something like "That's assuming the modders are interested in earning money to start with" that's true, but if they aren't interested in earning money the argument of bringing money brings and retain more talent is a lie, since money don't bring talent, money brings who wants money. being talented or not. While the talented people end getting the money they want, the not talented generally turns into a toxic element for the community that can make others talents leave. (It only takes one slip of Bethesda to give money to someone stealing ideas and we lose talent.)","author_url_name":"VitorBatista","author_url":"\/blogs\/VitorBatista\/994338\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294699","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"537269","anonymous":"0","date_time":"17 Jun 2017 at 4:25 am","website":"none","comment_body":"Thanks! That's a lot of material that we can actually discuss :).

Now, first up, on the general attitudes of the community. Obviously, I don't think the community is stupid. I also don't think that (as Nick speculates at the end of his article) this is about wanting to justify continuing to get everything for free. The survey I ran (for the purposes of my ongoing PhD research - so the question of paid mods was only a small side-issue that I didn't explore that deeply in the survey) indicates that while modders are indeed entirely disinterested in paying for mods, they are just as disinterested in earning money from mods. Most of the polled modders stated that if there was a possibility of charging money directly for mods, they still wouldn't do so.

So, on the community's part, it's neither stupidity nor greed (i.e. a desire to get stuff for free instead of paying). It's a strongly established sentiment, perhaps even deeper - we could even call it an ideology, if we're not too concerned about the potential negative connotations that word brings. The modding community is simply about free participation and sharing. The possibility of paid mods is naturally very concerning to the community, because it potentially threatens the current system. I do not think, however, that this is necessarily true. I get their concern, but I don't agree.

Now, addressing the four responses you made...
1. The new system does address the concern that someone will try to sell a mod that doesn't belong to them. The vetting on the part of Bethesda means that such situations not only can be prevented beforehand, but also addressed post-fact if something does slip by. Regarding the prevention of giving out free mods that are similar to paid mods, while it is imaginable that Bethesda could try to do so, I fail to see why and how they could go about doing it. Any such actions would alienate the community that Bethesda is very keen about supporting. Remember, from Bethesda's perspective, the revenue from paid mods is only going to ever be a fraction of the revenue from the games they sell. Paid mods are not a significant revenue stream - seriously, how much money is there to be made from a mod that charges, say, $10, and sells a few thousand units? Currently, less than 10% of Skyrim players use mods. Of those, a tiny fraction will pay for mods. What is important for Bethesda is rather the ability to provide financial incentives for modders, because a strong modding community encourages sales of the game.

2. This is the point on which I disagree the most, regarding the logic that you use. Let me put it this way: if you have a system in which everyone gets five cakes, except for one person who gets one cake, you can certainly argue that this one person also benefits from the system - but you can also argue that this one person is getting a raw deal. Modders obviously benefit from producing mods. They wouldn't be doing it if they felt that they are losing out somehow. But does this mean that they are not entitled to desire additional benefits, particularly when they see other parties getting these benefits? It is a fact, for instance, that YouTubers can earn money off people's mods. A modder potentially could try to become a successful YouTuber in his own right, but why should this be a pre-requisite to profit from mods?

3. I'll agree that this is not really an argument, so let's just leave it aside. The fact that they are entitled to do it has no relevance on the discussion of whether they should do it.

4. I don't think modders who continue putting out work for free will be swimming against the tide. Quite the opposite, I think most mods will remain free, because all evidence indicates that most modders prefer this. Furthermore, free mods will typically be able to go further in terms of scope and complexity - the giants like Skywind are really impossible to arrange on a commercial basis, because it would be just impossibly hard to divide up the (scarce) profits in such a way as to satisfy everyone. Plus, there are often networks of dependencies between mods. So I think we'll find that at least initially, the commercial mods will be relatively simple (which is not to say low-quality) - a new weapon, a new quest, etc. In the long-term, what we might wind up seeing is more successful commercial modders risking more complex mods by re-investing their profits to buy assets, especially to pay for voiceovers and the like. I think this is to be welcomed and desired. As a matter of fact, nothing would please me more than to see the Creation Club being treated as a kind of back-door to getting a license to use Bethesda's engine to develop a new game. And this is the one point where potentially, hypothetically, I may indeed have a personal stake in this: my PhD is about employing RPGs for cultural heritage especially for indigenous cultural groups who do not typically have access to significant resources. I think from the perspective of my research, the Creation Club is a game-changer, because it would allow resource-starved groups to basically experiment with high-quality game technology, without giving up the possibility of actually generating a revenue stream in the long term. I'll go even further and say that projects like this are the ones that are probably most likely to ultimately generate revenues that are actually significant. Very few people will buy a new axe mod (but if even fifty buy it, the modder who produced it will be happy). But many more people would buy a mod that converts Skyrim into a culturally rich game about a particular Australian Aboriginal, or Native American group (these are just two examples, of course).

All this being said, I think that particularly for mods that are built for Bethesda's games rather than as total conversions, free modders will always have the massive advantage of being able to use any other free content in their productions, and of being able to cajole free stuff out of volunteers. In my own (non-Bethesda) modding career, I've produced two large-scale Wing Commander mods which to this day remain more complex than most of the games I've worked on commercially (and I've got more than a decade of commercial games development under my belt, on multiple platforms and in multiple genres). Neither of these mods would have been feasible as a commercial product, because of the problems that money would bring into the mix. How do you decide what a "fair share" of revenue is, for the fifty people who sent you voiceovers for bit roles? How do you cope with a constantly-changing line-up, where a programmer disappears without a trace (do you hold on to his share, in the hope he shows up to claim it? When do you give up holding on?), where two new programmers come in for the last two years of a ten-year project, and so on? The acrimony this would have generated, all for the division of a likely small chunk of cash, would not have been worth it.

What all this means, to me, is that I can't really see the free modding community being destroyed by this. What I can see, is the rise of a second, semi-professional modding community alongside. When I ran my survey this year, in spite of the recent release of Skyrim's special edition, I found that actually there was dismally few modders who are still active enough to be willing to respond. Two months of posting at various forums, responding to people's questions, cajoling, begging, etc., resulted in just under 300 valid responses. That was more than sufficient for me, and I knew from the start that given the survey's length, I will only be getting the most dedicated community members to respond. But here's the thing: in 2012 or 2013, I would have gotten 300 responses in a week, and I'd probably have had to shut the survey down after a month for fear of getting more responses than I can reasonably process. What I'm getting at is that modding communities are far from constant - they are in perpetual flux, with modders moving on to whatever new game has caught their interest. Many of Skyrim's modders are probably now making Fallout 4 content. Many Fallout 4 modders will inevitably move on to TES 6 when it comes out. But equally many leave the community outright - trust me, it is really, really hard to reconcile modding with a career and a family. You get to a point where you really want to mod, but you just cannot justify the time investment. If at least some of the people who are in this situation find that they have an incentive to stick around and continue modding because they can actually get a financial reward out of it, that's not going to harm the community - quite the opposite, it will mean that some really talented people will stick around when they otherwise would have disappeared.

The opposite angle of this is the concern that people will transition from free modding to paid modding, and abandon the free modding community entirely, or even close themselves off from it outright - refusing to share their know-how, because they don't want competition. I don't want to fob this argument off, because with people, you never really know - but I do think it seems like an unlikely problem. Greed will cause some people to act in nasty ways, but given the overall mindset of the community, I think this will be a minor issue. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294665","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"537269","member_standing":null,"personId":"537269","firstname":"Jakub","lastname":"Majewski","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"1","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"Thanks! That's a lot of material that we can actually discuss :). Now, first up, on the general attitudes of the community. Obviously, I don't think the community is stupid. I also don't think that (as Nick speculates at the end of his article) this is about wanting to justify continuing to get everything for free. The survey I ran (for the purposes of my ongoing PhD research - so the question of paid mods was only a small side-issue that I didn't explore that deeply in the survey) indicates that while modders are indeed entirely disinterested in paying for mods, they are just as disinterested in earning money from mods. Most of the polled modders stated that if there was a possibility of charging money directly for mods, they still wouldn't do so. So, on the community's part, it's neither stupidity nor greed (i.e. a desire to get stuff for free instead of paying). It's a strongly established sentiment, perhaps even deeper - we could even call it an ideology, if we're not too concerned about the potential negative connotations that word brings. The modding community is simply about free participation and sharing. The possibility of paid mods is naturally very concerning to the community, because it potentially threatens the current system. I do not think, however, that this is necessarily true. I get their concern, but I don't agree. Now, addressing the four responses you made... 1. The new system does address the concern that someone will try to sell a mod that doesn't belong to them. The vetting on the part of Bethesda means that such situations not only can be prevented beforehand, but also addressed post-fact if something does slip by. Regarding the prevention of giving out free mods that are similar to paid mods, while it is imaginable that Bethesda could try to do so, I fail to see why and how they could go about doing it. Any such actions would alienate the community that Bethesda is very keen about supporting. Remember, from Bethesda's perspective, the revenue from paid mods is only going to ever be a fraction of the revenue from the games they sell. Paid mods are not a significant revenue stream - seriously, how much money is there to be made from a mod that charges, say, $10, and sells a few thousand units? Currently, less than 10% of Skyrim players use mods. Of those, a tiny fraction will pay for mods. What is important for Bethesda is rather the ability to provide financial incentives for modders, because a strong modding community encourages sales of the game. 2. This is the point on which I disagree the most, regarding the logic that you use. Let me put it this way: if you have a system in which everyone gets five cakes, except for one person who gets one cake, you can certainly argue that this one person also benefits from the system - but you can also argue that this one person is getting a raw deal. Modders obviously benefit from producing mods. They wouldn't be doing it if they felt that they are losing out somehow. But does this mean that they are not entitled to desire additional benefits, particularly when they see other parties getting these benefits? It is a fact, for instance, that YouTubers can earn money off people's mods. A modder potentially could try to become a successful YouTuber in his own right, but why should this be a pre-requisite to profit from mods? 3. I'll agree that this is not really an argument, so let's just leave it aside. The fact that they are entitled to do it has no relevance on the discussion of whether they should do it. 4. I don't think modders who continue putting out work for free will be swimming against the tide. Quite the opposite, I think most mods will remain free, because all evidence indicates that most modders prefer this. Furthermore, free mods will typically be able to go further in terms of scope and complexity - the giants like Skywind are really impossible to arrange on a commercial basis, because it would be just impossibly hard to divide up the (scarce) profits in such a way as to satisfy everyone. Plus, there are often networks of dependencies between mods. So I think we'll find that at least initially, the commercial mods will be relatively simple (which is not to say low-quality) - a new weapon, a new quest, etc. In the long-term, what we might wind up seeing is more successful commercial modders risking more complex mods by re-investing their profits to buy assets, especially to pay for voiceovers and the like. I think this is to be welcomed and desired. As a matter of fact, nothing would please me more than to see the Creation Club being treated as a kind of back-door to getting a license to use Bethesda's engine to develop a new game. And this is the one point where potentially, hypothetically, I may indeed have a personal stake in this: my PhD is about employing RPGs for cultural heritage especially for indigenous cultural groups who do not typically have access to significant resources. I think from the perspective of my research, the Creation Club is a game-changer, because it would allow resource-starved groups to basically experiment with high-quality game technology, without giving up the possibility of actually generating a revenue stream in the long term. I'll go even further and say that projects like this are the ones that are probably most likely to ultimately generate revenues that are actually significant. Very few people will buy a new axe mod (but if even fifty buy it, the modder who produced it will be happy). But many more people would buy a mod that converts Skyrim into a culturally rich game about a particular Australian Aboriginal, or Native American group (these are just two examples, of course). All this being said, I think that particularly for mods that are built for Bethesda's games rather than as total conversions, free modders will always have the massive advantage of being able to use any other free content in their productions, and of being able to cajole free stuff out of volunteers. In my own (non-Bethesda) modding career, I've produced two large-scale Wing Commander mods which to this day remain more complex than most of the games I've worked on commercially (and I've got more than a decade of commercial games development under my belt, on multiple platforms and in multiple genres). Neither of these mods would have been feasible as a commercial product, because of the problems that money would bring into the mix. How do you decide what a "fair share" of revenue is, for the fifty people who sent you voiceovers for bit roles? How do you cope with a constantly-changing line-up, where a programmer disappears without a trace (do you hold on to his share, in the hope he shows up to claim it? When do you give up holding on?), where two new programmers come in for the last two years of a ten-year project, and so on? The acrimony this would have generated, all for the division of a likely small chunk of cash, would not have been worth it. What all this means, to me, is that I can't really see the free modding community being destroyed by this. What I can see, is the rise of a second, semi-professional modding community alongside. When I ran my survey this year, in spite of the recent release of Skyrim's special edition, I found that actually there was dismally few modders who are still active enough to be willing to respond. Two months of posting at various forums, responding to people's questions, cajoling, begging, etc., resulted in just under 300 valid responses. That was more than sufficient for me, and I knew from the start that given the survey's length, I will only be getting the most dedicated community members to respond. But here's the thing: in 2012 or 2013, I would have gotten 300 responses in a week, and I'd probably have had to shut the survey down after a month for fear of getting more responses than I can reasonably process. What I'm getting at is that modding communities are far from constant - they are in perpetual flux, with modders moving on to whatever new game has caught their interest. Many of Skyrim's modders are probably now making Fallout 4 content. Many Fallout 4 modders will inevitably move on to TES 6 when it comes out. But equally many leave the community outright - trust me, it is really, really hard to reconcile modding with a career and a family. You get to a point where you really want to mod, but you just cannot justify the time investment. If at least some of the people who are in this situation find that they have an incentive to stick around and continue modding because they can actually get a financial reward out of it, that's not going to harm the community - quite the opposite, it will mean that some really talented people will stick around when they otherwise would have disappeared. The opposite angle of this is the concern that people will transition from free modding to paid modding, and abandon the free modding community entirely, or even close themselves off from it outright - refusing to share their know-how, because they don't want competition. I don't want to fob this argument off, because with people, you never really know - but I do think it seems like an unlikely problem. Greed will cause some people to act in nasty ways, but given the overall mindset of the community, I think this will be a minor issue.","author_url_name":"JakubMajewski","author_url":"\/blogs\/JakubMajewski\/\/","comment_likes":["994338"]},{"id":"294710","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"994338","anonymous":"0","date_time":"18 Jun 2017 at 3:11 am","website":"none","comment_body":"I think the main difference between us and what make our point of view so oposite is the trusth.

For what i have seen Bethesda doesn't deserve half the trusth you are putting in them. Seriously, i really don't get why so much trust on them when everything they have done so far shows that they DON'T deserve said trusth.

1 - Back in the paied mods they said the same thing and allowed it to happen, they said the same thing about their plataform and copyright and still allow it to happen.

2 - I see your point, but my problem is at what price said benefits will come for the few who wants it? It's fair to possibly destroy a community for the sake of a couple of modders that want to make modding a career instead of going indie.(What I believe it's better for everyone, mods is good and all but i rather have a new game to play in the market.)

3 - None

4 - Again i'm assuming that Bethesda will favor paied mods, then they ARE swimming against the tide. Had a good idea? too bad that it's too much like X paied mod. Also i agree that free mods still being the majority, but i think the numbers of free modders and modders in general, being free or paied, will be reduced by the simple fact that the community now will have more people putting their interest infront of the "community interest". That by itself will reduce the number of modders because they got their shit stolen, they weren't accepted in the club, or simply because they have a harder time finding the info they need.(I mean if they are doing the thing for free we can't blame them for giving up earlier because they couldn't find the info they needed\/others modders didn't help them)

You do bring a interesting question. What tools will be available for modders, if it would be a more potent tool, maybe they could do more complex mods, since, for example, the SKSE is just there to fill the holes that Bethesda created when cutting features of their engine to give it to modders.

Most of the modders simply left after the paied mods AND the Bethesda free plataform fiasco. Alot of modders that i know left because their mods were stolen, still in the Bethesda plataform under other users and Bethesda don't give a flying shit about it.(I mean Fallout 4 Modding community is pretty much dead, same could be said for Skyrim 64 if it wasn't for the "waiting skse excuse")

And i don't really think that paied mods will DESTROY the community, but it will be the first, or just another, bullet in it. It will not make it dissapear, it will just be another drop in it's quantity\/quality and put it one step closer to the bitter end.

PS: Just remember. Fallout 4 had 15k of mods in the FIRST month of it's life, the ammount of mods made dropped, A LOT. And you can argue that it's because the game got cold, but we are halfway through a month followers and weapons in the monthly rank. and wooping 317 votes there.... and same scenario in Skyrim and Skyrim 64(Special edition)

PS2: Also to make it clear: I have nothing against weapons and Followers mods, but they are simple mods. It was very rare for these tips to get in the top when the community was alive. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294699","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"994338","member_standing":null,"personId":"994338","firstname":"Vitor","lastname":"Batista","blog_id":"994338","portrait_path":"portrait.png?1562109761","legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"I think the main difference between us and what make our point of view so oposite is the trusth. For what i have seen Bethesda doesn't deserve half the trusth you are putting in them. Seriously, i really don't get why so much trust on them when everything they have done so far shows that they DON'T deserve said trusth. 1 - Back in the paied mods they said the same thing and allowed it to happen, they said the same thing about their plataform and copyright and still allow it to happen. 2 - I see your point, but my problem is at what price said benefits will come for the few who wants it? It's fair to possibly destroy a community for the sake of a couple of modders that want to make modding a career instead of going indie.(What I believe it's better for everyone, mods is good and all but i rather have a new game to play in the market.) 3 - None 4 - Again i'm assuming that Bethesda will favor paied mods, then they ARE swimming against the tide. Had a good idea? too bad that it's too much like X paied mod. Also i agree that free mods still being the majority, but i think the numbers of free modders and modders in general, being free or paied, will be reduced by the simple fact that the community now will have more people putting their interest infront of the "community interest". That by itself will reduce the number of modders because they got their shit stolen, they weren't accepted in the club, or simply because they have a harder time finding the info they need.(I mean if they are doing the thing for free we can't blame them for giving up earlier because they couldn't find the info they needed\/others modders didn't help them) You do bring a interesting question. What tools will be available for modders, if it would be a more potent tool, maybe they could do more complex mods, since, for example, the SKSE is just there to fill the holes that Bethesda created when cutting features of their engine to give it to modders. Most of the modders simply left after the paied mods AND the Bethesda free plataform fiasco. Alot of modders that i know left because their mods were stolen, still in the Bethesda plataform under other users and Bethesda don't give a flying shit about it.(I mean Fallout 4 Modding community is pretty much dead, same could be said for Skyrim 64 if it wasn't for the "waiting skse excuse") And i don't really think that paied mods will DESTROY the community, but it will be the first, or just another, bullet in it. It will not make it dissapear, it will just be another drop in it's quantity\/quality and put it one step closer to the bitter end. PS: Just remember. Fallout 4 had 15k of mods in the FIRST month of it's life, the ammount of mods made dropped, A LOT. And you can argue that it's because the game got cold, but we are halfway through a month followers and weapons in the monthly rank. and wooping 317 votes there.... and same scenario in Skyrim and Skyrim 64(Special edition) PS2: Also to make it clear: I have nothing against weapons and Followers mods, but they are simple mods. It was very rare for these tips to get in the top when the community was alive.","author_url_name":"VitorBatista","author_url":"\/blogs\/VitorBatista\/994338\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294783","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"537269","anonymous":"0","date_time":"21 Jun 2017 at 2:18 am","website":"none","comment_body":"Thanks for your response! It's a bit hard to keep track of discussions like this after the blog post they were attached to disappears off Gamasutra's front pages, so I'm going to end my input here. I'm not sure if you've moved my thinking too much on this issue, but I will agree that if this was all well and good, then we'd be seeing renewed interest in modding, rather than a decline in interest. ","comment_type":"reply","parent_id":"294710","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"537269","member_standing":null,"personId":"537269","firstname":"Jakub","lastname":"Majewski","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"reply","original_comment_body":"Thanks for your response! It's a bit hard to keep track of discussions like this after the blog post they were attached to disappears off Gamasutra's front pages, so I'm going to end my input here. I'm not sure if you've moved my thinking too much on this issue, but I will agree that if this was all well and good, then we'd be seeing renewed interest in modding, rather than a decline in interest.","author_url_name":"JakubMajewski","author_url":"\/blogs\/JakubMajewski\/\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1},{"id":"294623","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"1018091","anonymous":"0","date_time":"14 Jun 2017 at 5:21 am","website":"none","comment_body":"I feel like the section titled "4. A better system would be a donations system" is disingenuous.

Games like Cities: Skyline showed the power of systems like Patreon in the modding community, with news articles regularly covering mod authors who were doing well via Patreon (e.g. https:\/\/arstechnica.com\/gaming\/2015\/04\/how-a-cities-skylines-modder-turned-community-generosi ty-into-a-full-time-job\/).

As it is, the current donation system on Nexus Mods is horribly sub-par based on modern standards and their hands are tied by Bethesda who refuse to let them take it any further. And that's Bethesda prerogative, of course, but any issue with mod authors currently being unable to effectively monetise (or semi-monetise, in the form of donations) their work lies squarely at Bethesda's feet. ","comment_type":"comment","parent_id":"0","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"1018091","member_standing":null,"personId":"1018091","firstname":"Daniel","lastname":"Smith","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"1","com_rep":"comment","original_comment_body":"I feel like the section titled "4. A better system would be a donations system" is disingenuous. Games like Cities: Skyline showed the power of systems like Patreon in the modding community, with news articles regularly covering mod authors who were doing well via Patreon (e.g. https:\/\/arstechnica.com\/gaming\/2015\/04\/how-a-cities-skylines-modder-turned-community-generosity-into-a-full-time-job\/). As it is, the current donation system on Nexus Mods is horribly sub-par based on modern standards and their hands are tied by Bethesda who refuse to let them take it any further. And that's Bethesda prerogative, of course, but any issue with mod authors currently being unable to effectively monetise (or semi-monetise, in the form of donations) their work lies squarely at Bethesda's feet.","author_url_name":"DanielSmith","author_url":"\/blogs\/DanielSmith\/\/","comment_likes":["994338"]},{"id":"294635","legacy_id":null,"story_id":"299808","story_type":"blog","user_id":"998482","anonymous":"0","date_time":"14 Jun 2017 at 11:57 pm","website":"none","comment_body":""No reasonable person could deny his right to charge for his services, simply because they used to be free. "

terrible statement,
...sometimes money is a pathetic desire\/pursuit... for weak minded people...
","comment_type":"comment","parent_id":"0","old_story_id":null,"old_user_id":null,"memberId":"998482","member_standing":null,"personId":"998482","firstname":"Cao","lastname":"Cao","blog_id":null,"portrait_path":null,"legacy_blog_id":null,"num_likes":"0","com_rep":"comment","original_comment_body":""No reasonable person could deny his right to charge for his services, simply because they used to be free. " terrible statement, ...sometimes money is a pathetic desire\/pursuit... for weak minded people... ","author_url_name":"CaoCao","author_url":"\/blogs\/CaoCao\/\/","comment_likes":[""],"user_liked":1}],"artcle_comment_num":16,"articleUrl":"https:\/\/www.gamasutra.com\/loadcommentdetails"},"baseUrl":"https:\/\/www.gamasutra.com","articleUri":"\/blogs\/NickPearce\/20170612\/299808\/The_pros_and_cons_of_Bethesdas_Creation_Club.php","topCmtIds":[],"offComments":false}